Quantitative and qualitative content analysis

Early definitions of content analysis described this research technique as the tabulation of “the occurrences of units”; the characterisation of meaning in a “systematic and quantitative

fashion”; the “statistical semantics of political discourse”, with the roots of this technique having been in quantitative techniques (Franzosi, 2008: xxi). Quantification, notes Franzosi, goes “hand-in-hand with systemisation, rigor, precision …objectivity … [and] a scientific approach to social science (2008: xxii-xxiii). In this study, the aim of the quantitative content analysis component was to determine how many of each different kind of item (that is story, review or preview) were included in the research sample, as well as how many articles focused on each of the different artistic disciplines and how many of the articles focused on local artists as opposed to them being about national or international artists or entertainers.

While there are many different definitions of content analysis, which Neuendorf (2002: 10) believes is one of the fastest growing research techniques, it is Wigston’s contention that the concept remains the same: it is a method that focuses on the message “which is reduced to a set of categories representative of the research problem” (1997: 152) and allows the researcher to make inferences about the communicator’s intention and the recipient’s interpretation

(Wigston, 1997: 154). Outlining some of the advantages of content analysis, Wigston notes that it is sensitive to context; combines well with other methods and techniques; it can cope with large volumes of data; and it unobtrusive and non-reactive. Explaining the last point, he notes that often people alter their behaviour or responses when they know they are being observed, which can lead to the researcher obtaining false results (1997: 165-166).

The quantitative content analysis component of this study therefore enabled a sober assessment of the coverage of arts and entertainment in the research sample, without the influence of qualitative data which would later be collected through interviews and qualitatively looking at the content of the arts and entertainment items. The data collected quantitatively focused on “how many”, calculating, for example, the number of entertainment items, the number of different kinds of reporting, the number of reports dedicated to the different artistic disciplines, and how many critically engaged with the subject rather than reporting on what’s happening. In this way I was able to collect data which could be compared with the comments and input drawn from interviews with editors, reporters and communication practitioners, allowing me to compare these professionals’ perceptions of what they do and how they do it, and what the quantitative data reflects.

There are limitations to content analysis, however, among them that it is limited to examining messages which are recorded in retrievable format; it is not easy to use it to reliably

analyse latent messages and it cannot tell us how an audience reacts to the message (Wigston, 1997: 166). Added to this, Michaelson and Griffin note that while current methods of content analysis are diverse, all are flawed in that they are not able to determine the accuracy of the message and that message analysis is not linked to communication objectives (2005: 6).

Therefore, for content analysis to be useful, it must be applied in relation to the communication goals and objectives that the content analysis is tracking (Michaelson & Griffin, 2005: 12).

The aim of quantitative content analysis is to provide an account of what a media text contains (Gunter, 2012: 220). This kind of media content analysis is a specialised sub-set of content analysis, with MacNamara noting that scholars have referred to it as “the primary message-centred ideology” (2005: 1). It was communication theorist Harold Lasswell who introduced media content analysis as a method for studying mass media when he wanted to investigate propaganda, but it also became increasingly popular during the 1920s and 30s as a way to study the communication content of movies (MacNamara, 2005: 1). The arrival of television in the 1950s saw interest in media content analysis as a research methodology in social sciences and communication studies growing, with it becoming the primary research method for studying portrayals of violence, racism and women in TV and films. This is supported by Gunter who points out that in the 1940s, wartime intelligence used quantitative content analysis to monitor broadcasts for music and news content (2012: 219).

Gunter notes that quantitative studies of media content largely involving the surveying of media output. When using this approach, measurement is conducted by numbers and so data processing, analysis and interpretation must be carefully attended to as they are crucial to how effective the study will ultimately be (Gunter, 2012: 210). However, Deacon warns that when working with numbers, frequency should not be seen as being a definitive measure of

significance (2008: 92).

While MacNamara (2005: 2), citing Berelson, defines quantitative content analysis as “a research technique for the objective, systematic and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication”, the use of the word “objective” has been challenged because researchers believe not even the most scientific methods in social research can produce totally objective results (MacNamara , 2005: 2).

Quantitative content analysis, however, notes Deacon, has been criticised for ignoring the complexities of textual meaning and failing to engage with “people’s complex or interior lives or their situated cultural and social experiences” (2008: 92). A qualitative approach, on the other hand, can contribute to a “sustained, critical development of reflections and

The qualitative content analysis component of this study involved examining the tone of the articles in the sample as well as the disciplines contained within each story to ascertain what kind of entertainment stories were being published. Here distinctions were made between arts and entertainment items which were critical or informational, whether the language was simple or cluttered with jargon, how many – and whose – voices were represented in the stories, and the differences between articles attributed to reporters and those which appeared under no byline, or with a generic byline such as “staff writer”. Examining whose voices were represented on the entertainment pages helped to answer my research question relating to the role arts reporting can play in promoting local artists and artistic endeavours, while comparing the number of articles published under a reporter’s byline with those which are not, gave some insight into the resources available to community newspapers’ arts reporting function and how heavily PR copy was being relied on to populate arts and entertainment pages.

Comparing the results of content analysis along with input from editors, PR practitioners and arts promoters provided valuable insight into where the overlaps were in terms of what editors thought of their arts coverage, what promoters felt about their interactions with community media, and the interpretative results of qualitative content analysis.